Leading the way; making a difference

TECHNICAL WORKSHOP May 22, 2015

UPDATE ON US BWM

REQUIREMENTSJOSEPH ANGELO

DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR

Leading the way; making a difference

Final Regulations issued March 23, 2012

• BWM plan and recordkeeping (same as IMO)• BWM discharge standard (same as IMO), review in 4 yrs

• Schedule for installation of BWMS similar to IMO, BUTNO intent to align schedule with Resolution A.1088

• BWMS not required if no discharge of ballast water into US waters (12 miles)

• Acceptance of “Alternative” (AMS) BWMS for 5 years

• All ships must eventually install CG approved BWMS• Ships may request an extension to compliance

date for installation of a USCG approved BWMS

Ballast Water Management – USCG

Leading the way; making a difference

INTERTANKO Assisting Members with USCG regulations

• Implementation Schedule• Decision Tree

…

Ballast Water Management – USCG

Leading the way; making a difference

USCG Ballast Water Decision Tree

Leading the way; making a difference

US Coast Guard

INTERTANKO assisting Members• Implementation Schedule

• Decision Tree• Model Extension Request (MER) Letter

Ballast Water Management – USCG

Leading the way; making a difference

US Coast Guard – Extension requests

• January 1, 2016 extension date given to ships whose drydocking was scheduled for 2014

• January 1, 2017 extension date given to ships whose drydocking was scheduled for 2015

• Extensions for ships with drydockings in 2016 being considered

• Availability of USCG approved BWMS will be a factor in determining the length of time for future extensions

• INTERTANKO has developed Model Extension Request (MER) letter for members wishing to request extension

Ballast Water Management – USCG

Leading the way; making a difference

US Coast Guard – APPROVED BWM Systems

• CG has advised that 17 BWMS manufacturers have submitted “Letter of Intent” to pursue USCG approval (54 AMS accepted by USCG)

• For proprietary reasons, USCG cannot tell who those BWMS manufacturers are

• INTERTANKO has contacted BWMS manufacturers to determine which of them have submitted “Letter of Intent” (results on INTERTANKO web site)

• Only after the testing is completed and the results have been evaluated, will a BWMS manufacturer then submit an application to the USCG for approval of their BWMS

Ballast Water Management – USCG

Leading the way; making a difference

1. NK 03

2. Coldharbour Marine

3. Erma First BWTS

4. RWO – Cleanballast

5. Hyde Guardian (UV)

6. Techcross Electrocleen

7. Samsung – Purimar

8. Trojan Marinex (UV)

9. Evoqua – SeaCure BWTS

10.NEI – Venturi Oxygen

Stripping

11. Optimarine – OBS EX (UV)

12.Oceansaver Mk II

13.Wartsila – Aquarius EC

14.Severn Trent – Balpure

15.DESMI – Ray Clean (UV)

16.Alfa Laval – Pureballast (UV)

17.??

Ballast Water Management – USCG

Leading the way; making a difference

US Coast Guard – APPROVED BWM Systems

• USCG has received three applications for BWMS type approval (all three make use of UV treatment)

• UV BWMS need further USCG “validation” of methodology for biological efficacy

• CG indicates that they expect to have a USCG approved BWMS “sometime in 2015”

• CG indicates they will be “realistic” in requiring when a ship calling at US ports must have a CG approved BWM system installed

Ballast Water Management – USCG

Leading the way; making a difference

Shipowner dilemma!!

US is not party to IMO BWM treaty. USCG regs: • Allow use of Alternate Management System (AMS) for

five years• After five years, require installation of USCG approved

BWMS• Currently no BWMS is USCG approved

Ship operator must decide to either install AMS (and hope it gets USCG approval!) OR request an extension and hope there is a CG approved BWMS available for installation on their ship prior to the required installation date under the IMO Convention. 

Ballast Water Management

Leading the way; making a difference

If I owned a tanker, I would –

• Conduct preparatory work to determine:a. which type of BWMS is best for my shipb. there is proper space to install the BWMS I want on my ship

• Request extension from US Coast Guard

• Once I know when IMO BWM convention will enter into force, request the issuance of new MARPOL Annex 1 IOPP Certificate

• When available, purchase USCG approved BWMS that is best for my ship

 

Ballast Water Management

Leading the way; making a difference

EPA Vessel General Permit issued December 19, 2013

• To a large extent EPA VGP requirements are the same as USCG (discharge standard, compliance schedule, etc.)

• Approval of BWMS is not required• BWMS monitoring required (functionality, equipment

calibration, effluent, biocides)• New ship (keel laid after December 1, 2013) is required to

install a BWMS to comply with the VGP, i.e. no acceptance of USCG extension provision in the VGP

• EPA /USCG MoU – EPA Enforcement Policy, 27 Dec 2013• Vessel with USCG extension is non-compliant (if

discharges in US waters – 3 miles), but EPA regards as a low-enforcement priority, provided all other regs are met

Ballast Water Management – USEPA

Leading the way; making a difference

Potential issue with EPA Enforcement Policy??

• Charter party agreements require tanker to be in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations

• Tanker that receives CG extension would be in compliance with CG requirements

• Tanker that has CG extension and discharges ballast water within US waters (3 miles) would be in violation of EPA Vessel General Permit

• Would this violate charter party agreements???• Thus far, not aware of any comments from oil majors or

charterers on this issue

Ballast Water Management – USEPA

Leading the way; making a difference

THANKYOU!